[quote]Sifu wrote:
This is not about demonstrating our tolerance. I don’t think muslims are the ones to be teaching anyone about tolerance when their entire history has been one of overwhelming intolerance. [/quote]
The history of Islam has nothing to do with the present or the future.
Tolerance does not come from any religion. It comes from tolerant people.
Clearly you have not met any Muslims if you think they are all intolerant. In fact, my experience is the exact opposite. They have all been way more tolerant than any devout Christian or Jew I have EVER met.
Congratulations, you have been dominated by a bunch of superstitious goat herders from 12000 miles away.[/quote]
You have demonstrated your ignorance too many times for me to waste much time on you.
People get judged based upon their history all the time. Muslims as a group have historically been very intolerant of others. Their religion teaches them to be intolerant.
Clearly you have not met any people who have had their family or friends killed or injured by muslims, while I have.
The incidents of “terrorism” experienced by peaceful Muslim US citizens in this country since 9/11 at the hands of non-Muslims FAR outnumber those of the opposite.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
Clearly you have not met any people who have had their family or friends killed or injured by muslims, while I have. [/quote]
You’re such a pussy.[/quote]
And why is that? Because I can see the other side of the issue? Because I don’t let a bunch of liberal assholes like Olbermann spoon feed me my thoughts.
I have news for you homeboy. As big of a shock as it was for America when 9/11 occurred it was not something new and unusual for people in other parts of the world who are used to living near muslims. 9/11 was just one more in a chain of massacres that goes all the way back to mohammad. You should try hanging out with some Hindus sometime or some Sikhs.
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
The incidents of “terrorism” experienced by peaceful Muslim US citizens in this country since 9/11 at the hands of non-Muslims FAR outnumber those of the opposite.
[/quote]
You need to lay off of the rocks Holmes. At Christmas last year my hometown almost had a flaming jumbo jet dumped on us. What about the muslim US citizen who shot up an army base in Texas? Or the muslim US citizen who tried to set off a car bomb in New York a few months ago? What about the rising number of hate crimes against Jews in this country and in Europe that are being committed by muslims?
Even if all that is true what you say, Sifu, you still have literally no right to forbid them the mosque because of “sensitivity”.
As much as I have a distaste for these breeding grounds for idiocy (any monotheism), I really don’t see how anyone will succeed to limit their property rights from a legal point of view.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
Clearly you have not met any people who have had their family or friends killed or injured by muslims, while I have. [/quote]
You’re such a pussy.[/quote]
And why is that? Because I can see the other side of the issue? Because I don’t let a bunch of liberal assholes like Olbermann spoon feed me my thoughts.
I have news for you homeboy. As big of a shock as it was for America when 9/11 occurred it was not something new and unusual for people in other parts of the world who are used to living near muslims. 9/11 was just one more in a chain of massacres that goes all the way back to mohammad. You should try hanging out with some Hindus sometime or some Sikhs. [/quote]
Who has killed more people on foreign soil since the second world war? All muslim countries combined or America? Correct answer is America.
[quote]molnes wrote:
Who has killed more people on foreign soil since the second world war? All muslim countries combined or America? Correct answer is America. [/quote]
ROFLMAO.
In 1980 Iraq invaded Iran, and the ensuing war produced at least 500,000 deaths and hundreds of thousands of wounded in Iran.
Wars started by muslims (against everyone from Christians to Hindus to Buddist to atheist communists) in Bosnia, Kosovo, Macedonia, Chechnya, Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, Kashmir, India, the Philippines, Indonesia, Sudan and Nigeria have killed in the millions.
According to the International Institute of Strategic Studies, 32 armed conflicts were underway in 2000; more than two thirds involved Muslims. Yet Muslims are only about one fifth of the world’s population.
I just sent these two links to a friend I’m having a debate with. Allowing such irrational sentiment against the building of anything Islamic because of the “sacredness” of Ground Zero is why the following absurdities have happened:
“What’s crazy is that, up until a few months ago, the term “ground zero” was understood to mean the former site of World Trade Center by, literally, everyone. Now, suddenly, ground zero is undefinable. It’s everywhere. Or at least everywhere someone wants to build a mosque.”
“Ahmed H. Sharif, 43, of Queens, was stabbed several times by Michael Enright, 21, of Southeast, N.Y., after Enright had asked Sharif if he was Muslim and the cabbie responded that he was, a police spokesman said.”
Oh, and I guess this is Glenn Beck’s “rebuttal” to Keith Olbermann:
[quote]Sifu wrote:
They are deliberately rubbing salt in an open wound looking to get a reaction.
[/quote]
That is YOUR assumption and to claim THAT is the reason for building the community center - my own Muslim friend says he wouldn’t accept that as a “mosque” because it’s not solely a place of worship - then you are falling for the same Right-wing bullshit hysteria.
Watch the Olbermann video because he makes excellent, COHERENT arguments, unlike Newt/Palin/Beck and the other fear mongerers.
Here is a great discussion on CNN about the whole debate, from both sides and moderated by Fareed Zakaria. Please watch this first:
A) The 9/11 inauguration date. I did not see a single reference to that anywhere.
"There are many claims in the media that the proposed mosque is set to open on September 11, 2011, the tenth anniversary of the attacks. Admittedly, I cannot find any direct quotes from Rauf himself on confirming that particular day for the proposed inauguration date. Indeed, in an interview published on May 26, Rauf denied that the mosque/Islamic center would be opened on that date. However, in the same interview, he suggested that the 9/11 victims would be commemorated in the mosque:
In the interview, Rauf said his own congregation was affected by 9/11. “We had 200 people who bled and died on 9/11. We gave water to firefighters; doctors from the community volunteered to be medics. We are part of the 9/11 family,” said Rauf, reiterating his plans to put a memorial inside the Islamic center with the names of 9/11 victims."
From an interview with Imam Rauf, denying the 9/11/2011 “inauguration” date:
“Rauf said the mosque would not open on the anniversary of 9/11, and that it would take between 18 months to three years before the money is raised to open the center at the old Burlington Coat Factory building on Park Place, which was damaged on 9/11.”
Also, accusations that Glenn Beck and Pamela Geller intentionally lied about the 9/11 inauguration date
"Its name - Cordoba House - is not a tribute to medieval Muslim subjugation of Spain. Newt Gingrich has been pushing that nonsense, that “Cordoba” is a Muslim dog-whistle for “triumphalism.” "It refers to Córdoba, Spain - the capital of Muslim conquerors who symbolized their victory over the Christian Spaniards by transforming a church there into the world’s third-largest mosque complex. Today, some of the mosque’s backers insist this term is being used to ‘symbolize interfaith co-operation’ when, in fact, every Islamist in the world recognizes Córdoba as a symbol of Islamic conquest.
Those “Muslim conquerors” are a figment of Mr. Gingrich’s lurid imagination. In Spain, in Cordoba, though the Muslims established multi-cultural, non-denominational institutions of learning, they were under constant attack from Christians, and from a series of internal all-Muslim Civil Wars. The Muslims lost Cordoba, and the Christian church they transformed into the “world’s third-largest mosque complex?” It was turned back into a Christian Cathedral. In the 13th Century. And it has been that, ever since."
And by the way, a point Mr. Gingrich has not even whispered as he has shouted fire in a crowded theaterâ??when the historical implications of Cordoba were made clear to the backers of this project, the property developer, Sharif Gamal, changed the name. They already compromised.
“We are calling it Park 51 because of the backlash to the name Cordoba House,” he told the Financial Times. "
C) The Imam’s own background. He was first appointed by Bush and then by Obama, as a figure to facilitate inter-faith dialogue.
“If one were to hearken back to the halcyon days of the Bush Administration, one would remember that, when Bush adviser Karen Hughes was appointed Undersecretary of State for Public Diplomacy, the Bush Administration saw improving America’s standing among Muslims abroad as a part of its national security strategy. And, as such, Hughes set up listening tours, attended meetings and worked with interfaith groups that – shocking, by today’s Republican standards – included actual Muslims.”
D) My favorite: Colin Powell, spoke out against accusations of Obama being “Muslim” even though he admitted that he would NOT endorse the Obama campaign:
"Powell also spoke passionately against the insinuations by some Republicans that Obama is a Muslim.
“Well, the correct answer is, he is not a Muslim, he’s a Christian. He’s always been a Christian,” he said. “But the really right answer is, what if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer’s no, that’s not America. Is there something wrong with some seven-year-old Muslim-American kid believing that he or she could be president? Yet, I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion, ‘He’s a Muslim and he might be associated terrorists.’ This is not the way we should be doing it in America.”
Powell said he does not plan to campaign for Obama."
E) History of the actual mosque in Cordoba, which is now a cathedral:
“Perhaps spatial reality functions differently on the other side of the Atlantic, but here in London, something that is “two minutes’ walk and round a corner” from something else isn’t actually “in” the same place at all. I once had a poo in a pub about two minutes’ walk from Buckingham Palace. I was not subsequently arrested and charged with crapping directly onto the Queen’s pillow. That’s how “distance” works in Britain. It’s also how distance works in America, of course, but some people are currently pretending it doesn’t, for daft political ends.”
Having read through the last five pages of this thread (regrettably):
A showing of uber-tolerance at the building of a mosque close to Ground Zero as a “weapon” to show barbarian Islamists the error of their ways by highlighting their “intolerance” by our example is about as effective as stabbing someone with a banana. Islamists aren’t going to start seeing news coverage of our uber-tolerance, look around the room, well up with tears, and begin soulful self-reflection that maybe, just maybe, their murderous ideology should be abandoned.
Build a mosque or don’t, but this argument in favor of it might be the dumbest thing I have ever read.
The issue is less about “private property” and more about freedom of speech. If enough speech convinces the builders not to build there, speech has done its job - persuade. Nothing wrong with exercising that right to persuade.
It has nothing to do with Islamophobia. It’s a matter of taste and tact and symbolism, similar to (as one commentator noted) disapproval of the Confederate flag being incorporated into the state flag and flying it over the state capital. No one is hurt by the Confederate symbolism atop a statehouse - but there was no shortage of expressed opinion saying the flag should be removed in favor of a symbol that wasn’t so inconsiderate.
So, to say “don’t build the mosque because it would be tacky or inconsiderate given the circumstances” isn’t “Islamophobic!” and don’t believe the brain-dead twerps demagoguing it as such.
I am reminded of the true definition of “multiculturalism” - “demonstrating heightened, even extreme sensitivity and a willingness to bend over backwards to accommodate a given culture - except your own”.
[quote]molnes wrote:
Who has killed more people on foreign soil since the second world war? All muslim countries combined or America? Correct answer is America. [/quote]
ROFLMAO.
In 1980 Iraq invaded Iran, and the ensuing war produced at least 500,000 deaths and hundreds of thousands of wounded in Iran.
Wars started by muslims (against everyone from Christians to Hindus to Buddist to atheist communists) in Bosnia, Kosovo, Macedonia, Chechnya, Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, Kashmir, India, the Philippines, Indonesia, Sudan and Nigeria have killed in the millions.
According to the International Institute of Strategic Studies, 32 armed conflicts were underway in 2000; more than two thirds involved Muslims. Yet Muslims are only about one fifth of the world’s population.
[/quote]
Oops.
Somebody was just made to look stupid![/quote]
Wars America stuck its fat nose in:
Korea, Vietnam, two Gulf Wars, Kosovo.
Do I need to go compile the body count from each conflict?
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Even if all that is true what you say, Sifu, you still have literally no right to forbid them the mosque because of “sensitivity”.
As much as I have a distaste for these breeding grounds for idiocy (any monotheism), I really don’t see how anyone will succeed to limit their property rights from a legal point of view.
[/quote]
I have never said they should be forbidden so I don’t know where you are coming from with this. WTF! Just a few posts back in the thread I stated that they have a right to build it. As the president said they have a first amendment right to worship. Just as those who think it is a bad idea have the right to say so.
The first amendment is a beautiful thing, there is nothing else like it in this world. So I would hate to see it destroyed over one mosque or some political bullshit like a flag burning amendment.
America is different from Europe. As much as Americans think their government has been ingeniously designed, they don’t think government is the solution to everything. As long as the mosque builders are within their rights and obey local zoning ordinances and the protesters don’t break any laws either, I think the government staying out of it will the best response.
That is why you won’t see a European solution where the government comes in and either forbids the mosque (which would be highly unlikely to happen in Europe) or the government charges all the protesters with inciting racial hatred, arrests all of them and destroys their lives (this would be the most likely solution in Europe).
Personally I think the Imam building the mosque is not as moderate as people are saying he is. I think he dislikes America and he sees the mosque as a way to divide us and do damage. If you listen to Keith Olbermann’s bombastic videos you can see that he has already succeeded. Because thanks to Keith there are going to be some of his followers who are going to have a reason to be all pissy at another group of Americans instead of having a little bit of understanding and acceptance as to why people feel the way they do.
[quote]molnes wrote:
Who has killed more people on foreign soil since the second world war? All muslim countries combined or America? Correct answer is America. [/quote]
ROFLMAO.
In 1980 Iraq invaded Iran, and the ensuing war produced at least 500,000 deaths and hundreds of thousands of wounded in Iran.
Wars started by muslims (against everyone from Christians to Hindus to Buddist to atheist communists) in Bosnia, Kosovo, Macedonia, Chechnya, Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, Kashmir, India, the Philippines, Indonesia, Sudan and Nigeria have killed in the millions.
According to the International Institute of Strategic Studies, 32 armed conflicts were underway in 2000; more than two thirds involved Muslims. Yet Muslims are only about one fifth of the world’s population.
[/quote]
Oops.
Somebody was just made to look stupid![/quote]
No, not at all. America has killed millions of people in Vietnam alone. Also America has been involved in many of the conflicts you mention above. Nobody beats the US when it comes to killing people on foreign soil since the second world war.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
Clearly you have not met any people who have had their family or friends killed or injured by muslims, while I have. [/quote]
You’re such a pussy.[/quote]
And why is that? Because I can see the other side of the issue? Because I don’t let a bunch of liberal assholes like Olbermann spoon feed me my thoughts.
I have news for you homeboy. As big of a shock as it was for America when 9/11 occurred it was not something new and unusual for people in other parts of the world who are used to living near muslims. 9/11 was just one more in a chain of massacres that goes all the way back to mohammad. You should try hanging out with some Hindus sometime or some Sikhs. [/quote]
Who has killed more people on foreign soil since the second world war? All muslim countries combined or America? Correct answer is America. [/quote]
The US has not gone around killing people over religion. So what is the point that you are trying to make? Prior to WW2 muslims have killed several times the number who died in WW2 and after WW2 they have killed millions. The killing of such large numbers was justified by muslims because their victims were non muslims.
During the cold war the 1967 and 1973 Arab Israeli wars nearly resulted in a nuclear exchange. The 1973 war cause the US to go on a full nuclear alert against the Soviet Union. Today we have the Pakistanis threatening the Indians with nuclear weapons and launching terrorist attacks into India trying to trigger a war. Next we are going to have the Iranians threatening the Jews in Israel and the Sunni’s in Pakistan. Their hatred of the Jews and Hindus threatens to wipe out all of humanity and they don’t care because Jihad will be rewarded in heaven.
[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:
I just sent these two links to a friend I’m having a debate with. Allowing such irrational sentiment against the building of anything Islamic because of the “sacredness” of Ground Zero is why the following absurdities have happened:
“What’s crazy is that, up until a few months ago, the term “ground zero” was understood to mean the former site of World Trade Center by, literally, everyone. Now, suddenly, ground zero is undefinable. It’s everywhere. Or at least everywhere someone wants to build a mosque.”
“Ahmed H. Sharif, 43, of Queens, was stabbed several times by Michael Enright, 21, of Southeast, N.Y., after Enright had asked Sharif if he was Muslim and the cabbie responded that he was, a police spokesman said.”
Oh, and I guess this is Glenn Beck’s “rebuttal” to Keith Olbermann:
Can Beck make a single coherent argument? Ever?[/quote]
Thanks for the video it gave me a giggle. Damn it! That is video of Beck’s radio show, radio shows are like that. Damn it! GB is making fun of the fact that no one pays any attention to KO. While GB is the number 2 rated show just behind Oprah.